Hi Jeremy, Yes, most people should just let UUID do it's thing. I left out the reason "why" in my original post, for the sake of brevity. The answer, below. Still hope someone will answer the question I posed, however. Cheers, Carl = = = = = EXPLANATION FOR MY UNUSUAL DESIRES = = = = = I'm basically a SOHO personal user, single system, with a strong background in the fundamentals of computing. I taught a very wide range of 1st and 2nd year courses at university and technical colleges, and used Linux (when the kernel was 0.96.x and there was no GUI) as a teaching tool. I also worked as a hardware/software techie in the days of CP/M, MSDOS and Windows 3.x. But had a couple of career changes since then. Am now very out of date on the latest IT industry changes, and the details of Linux sysop'ing for most things. (Used to use vi and EMACS, and could type out working shell commands as quick as I thought up the need, but now would be at a total loss with them. Sigh.) Just built up twin 64-bit desktop machines from scratch, and they fired up perfectly, though. UUID makes my own (quick, elegant, thorough, useful, tried & true) backup system fail. I started this system (and benefited from it a few times since then) back before UUID was implemented in Linux. After creating my master disk, I create 2 (or more) backup hard disks (similar partitions, OSs, etc.). Then I use a robust script incorporating rsync at least once a week to ensure each partition on each backup disk is a complete copy of the master disk. Each backup disk is stored in a separate physical location from my home. The beauty of this system is that (when the master disk fails) I slip out the master, slip in a "backup" and turn on my computer. Voila! Up and running (with every single detail the same) in the time it just takes to boot up. UUID (and SELINUX -- is that in Ubuntu nowadays?) thwart that excellent "restore". Explanations for why I use at least two backups, store them in distant locations, don't use "the cloud", don't use RAID, don't use other backup methods, etc. could fill a chapter in a book. (Lots of years supporting lots of small business computer owners has taught me a few things.) Hope that's quenched your curiosity. Hope someone critiques my planned UUID workaround/kludge, soon. Cheers. On 21/04/14 23:54, Jeremy Visser wrote:
On 21 Apr 2014, at 17:19, Carl Turney <carl@boms.com.au> wrote:
Want to disable UUID, and address hardware directly by device and partition specs.
Hmm.
My knowledge is low. (Barely understand what I'm writing.)
Hmmmmm.
There benefits of UUIDs outweighs the disadvantages for the majority of users. Given your own admission of a lack of knowledge, what makes you sure you want to second guess what is a very sane default made by technically capable decision-makers?
You have every right to shoot yourself in the foot, so I won’t stop you, but I’m curious why you want to do so.
_______________________________________________ luv-main mailing list luv-main@luv.asn.au http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main